Independence - how would you vote?

[Tryfield]

Because what happened to Farage was outstanding. Personally I just wish someone had launched a brick into his disgusting English face to make it clear that he isnt welcome.

Which apparently is perfectly okay to say, after all, just a "throwaway comment".

Incidentally, what exactly should he be condemming?

^ ^ ^

Really angry at the inevitable No vote.

[D-Day]

He complains bitterly about the UK/Scotland running at a deficit on the one hand, and now holds up the deficit as an example of British munificence. I don't think this is dodging/dishonesty, I just think he legitimately can't see the massive contradiction.

So would we actually run a budget surplus post-indy? I genuinely never knew that £46billion pays for everything north of the border and that the other £17billion is fucked about by the cronies in London on utterly useless shite.

[Swampy]

So would we actually run a budget surplus post-indy? I genuinely never knew that £46billion pays for everything north of the border and that the other £17billion is fucked about by the cronies in London on utterly useless shite.

Scotland runs at a deficit as well but a lesser deficit than Westminster.

[D-Day]

Scotland runs at a deficit as well but a lesser deficit than Westminster.

I know that, but if, like the graphic suggests, ~£53billion is generated in Scotland and ~£46billion comes back to Scotland (paying for everything), then surely if the additional ~£17billion spent by Westminster "on our behalf" on unneeded nonsense like Trident was removed, then we would actually run a budget surplus?

[Baxter Parp]

I know that, but if, like the graphic suggests, ~£53billion is generated in Scotland and ~£46billion comes back to Scotland (paying for everything), then surely if the additional ~£17billion spent by Westminster "on our behalf" on unneeded nonsense like Trident was removed, then we would actually run a budget surplus?

No it's our £7Bn plus £10Bn more that the UK borrows and spends on our behalf. The £10Bn is the deficit. Which is smaller than the UK deficit as a whole. Obviously we would need to borrow less, but there's no doubt we would need to borrow. To be clear I mean to say that we would have our own infrastructure projects to pay for and we would have to borrow to pay for them, but not nearly as much as the UK does.

[D-Day]

No it's our £7Bn plus £10Bn more that the UK borrows and spends on our behalf. The £10Bn is the deficit. Which is smaller than the UK deficit as a whole. Obviously we would need to borrow less, but there's no doubt we would need to borrow. To be clear I mean to say that we would have our own infrastructure projects to pay for and we would have to borrow to pay for them, but not nearly as much as the UK does.

But what does that mean for "~£46billion pays for everything in Scotland when we generate ~£53billion" though?

It also says "We get the debt, and pay the interest, for spending we don't want or need."

[Bad Day]

Sound like a wum on this website but for the rest of Scotland i don't.

Independence won't go through and this is an extremely disenchanted forum.

[DeeGas]

Salmond and Co will still carry on causing trouble if they lose the referendum won't they.

Still,a crushing defeat may be the beginning of the end for them.

Let's hope so.

[Reynard]

I genuinely do not know what you are slavering about here btw. But like I've said, even the incorrect figures in your signature still prove that Scotland is better off economically than the CDU.

How's the new house?

Got any more pics of it?

[D-Day]

All a no vote will do is eventually wake-up the morons who voted no into realising their idiocy when we continue to get shat on by Westminster.

If, as seems likely, there is a no vote, there is no doubt at all in my mind that there will be another referendum in my lifetime, which will be voted through.

[D-Day]

How's the new house?

Got any more pics of it?

What a lunatic you are.

[Reynard]

What a lunatic you are.

#Innocent face

[DeeGas]

All a no vote will do is eventually wake-up the morons who voted no into realising their idiocy when we continue to get shat on by Westminster.

If, as seems likely, there is a no vote, there is no doubt at all in my mind that there will be another referendum in my lifetime, which will be voted through.

Dream on.

The Union will win the referendum,the huge majority will accept this,they will then go about their British lives accordingly.

Greater ties between England and Scotland will be created.

The Union will then grow stronger and the shout for an independent Scotland will look just plain unfriendly and daft.

[H_B]

Salmond got what he wanted.

No he didn't. He didn't remotely get what he wanted.

Whether you are a Yes or a No voter doesn't really matter. Everyone can agree that the terms of the Edinburgh agreement were overwhelmingly in the favour of David Cameron.

The SNP were done up like a kipper. I genuinely don't think Cameron would have been able to believe his luck.

[H_B]

Im sure he will be able to confirm that he was in complete agreement with me all along. After all, he has been utterly consistent.

That's right. I was. I said at the time it was insanity from Salmond.

Don't get me wrong - I'm pleased that the Nationalists were completely wrong footed and went down the stupid route they have of entering into an unwinnable referendum but I was amazed at the time and I'm more amazed now.

I would have bet good money on there not being a single question referendum. In fact, I said as much to Mr Rational at the time. I credited the Nats with being a bit smarter than that. Wrongly as it happens.

[xbl]

So hb, did you agree with me last year when I made the arguments you are making now? Were you utterly consistent?

Ah, at last! Its funny, but when I was saying f**k the brits, I dont recall you agreeing...

[D-Day]

Dream on.

The Union will win the referendum,the huge majority will accept this,they will then go about their British lives accordingly.

Greater ties between England and Scotland will be created.

The Union will then grow stronger and the shout for an independent Scotland will look just plain unfriendly and daft.

We have had over 300 years to "build great ties" and "be strong"; it's hardly worked out great, has it?

Nothing lasts forever, champ.

[H_B]

Cameron can now go away, wash his hands of the entire thing knowing Salmond will lose and can now point to the fact that he allowed the Scots to have exactly what they had asked for, a referendum on independence which they rejected.

Time will tell whether momentum builds for something afterwards, it took quite a long time for any recovery after 79, but eventually the groundswell was definitely right there all across Scotland. Its not now, and there's every chance it has been knocked on the head for a generation or two.

There was a chance, and it was blown.

Indeed. Which is why I asked the question about when the pronouncements about further devolution requiring a UK mandate came out.

Cameron has buried Salmond here. It's one of the reasons why he doesn't even bother his arse campaigning around the issue. He knows all he needs to do is sit in London and watch the SNP lose, whilst he can say "I played ball and acceded gracefully to your referendum. You held it - you failed - back in yer box son".

A question all the Yes voters need to ask is, when the referendum is lost in 2014, would they consider the SNP's position to be stronger or weaker than at the point of the Edinburgh agreement. And you would have to conclude it is weaker. Much weaker. And it didn't have to be like that.

[Reynard]

Indeed. Which is why I asked the question about when the pronouncements about further devolution requiring a UK mandate came out.

Cameron has buried Salmond here. It's one of the reasons why he doesn't even bother his arse campaigning around the issue. He knows all he needs to do is sit in London and watch the SNP lose, whilst he can say "I played ball and acceded gracefully to your referendum. You held it - you failed - back in yer box son".

Indeed. Which is why I asked the question about when the pronouncements about further devolution requiring a UK mandate came out.

Cameron has buried Salmond here. It's one of the reasons why he doesn't even bother his arse campaigning around the issue. He knows all he needs to do is sit in London and watch the SNP lose, whilst he can say "I played ball and acceded gracefully to your referendum. You held it - you failed - back in yer box son".

A question all the Yes voters need to ask is, when the referendum is lost in 2014, would they consider the SNP's position to be stronger or weaker than at the point of the Edinburgh agreement. And you would have to conclude it is weaker. Much weaker. And it didn't have to be like that.

I'm looking forward to seeing them tear themselves apart afterwards. I love watching political parties doing that.

[H_B]

So hb, did you agree with me last year when I made the arguments you are making now? Were you utterly consistent?

Ah, at last! Its funny, but when I was saying f**k the brits, I dont recall you agreeing...

Two things.

1) As banterman noted, I am not saying at all that I wanted this to happen. I am saying this is what the SNP should have done. They should have fought their battle before the Edinburgh Agreement. The SNP should never have signed an agreement with a single question referendum. It was utter stupidity. And they've paid for it ever since with this shambles of a campaign.

2) Your submissions were around a UDI which would have been, and would be, insanity. This consultative referendum would have had no legal legitimacy from an Independence point of view. That's where you erred. It would have been worthless as a vehicle for declaring independence, but that was never an issue as the people want nothing to do with independence.